Flight Simmers - How do you make the yoke better?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Location: South Yorkshire
Age: 36
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flight Simmers - How do you make the yoke better?
Hi all,
I recently had a go on a (non-flyer) friend's FS 2003 setup and thought it would be good to build a basic setup for IFR hold practice. I would, however, like the yoke to feel a bit more realistic than my friend's did.
I didn't think the pedals were bad, but the yoke (CH products) didn't seem to have enough travel and thus was a bit too sensitive. I found the PA28 on the sim much harder to fly than the real one I fly. It seemed 'twitchy' and with nil wind set, it was impossible to let go of the yoke and allow the virtual plane to fly its self. I can imagine flying any sort of hold on it being very difficult.
I put this down to the travel because at full aileron deflection, the yoke must have been at about 70 degrees from the neutral position. The elevator was even worse, at only a few inches to full up.
I've done some digging and seen that the Saitek Cessna yoke claims to have 180 degree travel which would be better (I imagine) but the PA28 I fly still has more than this.
I know that flying IFR I probably won't need to take the control surfaces to their full deflection, so is there a way of 'capping' the maximum travel of the virtual ailerons, so that, say, full 90 degrees to the right on the yoke gives me 70% aileron travel? If this's possible I don't see it solving the twitchy elevator though, as full travel will be needed in the flare!
Does anyone know if this can be made realistic/are there better yokes?
Cheers!
I recently had a go on a (non-flyer) friend's FS 2003 setup and thought it would be good to build a basic setup for IFR hold practice. I would, however, like the yoke to feel a bit more realistic than my friend's did.
I didn't think the pedals were bad, but the yoke (CH products) didn't seem to have enough travel and thus was a bit too sensitive. I found the PA28 on the sim much harder to fly than the real one I fly. It seemed 'twitchy' and with nil wind set, it was impossible to let go of the yoke and allow the virtual plane to fly its self. I can imagine flying any sort of hold on it being very difficult.
I put this down to the travel because at full aileron deflection, the yoke must have been at about 70 degrees from the neutral position. The elevator was even worse, at only a few inches to full up.
I've done some digging and seen that the Saitek Cessna yoke claims to have 180 degree travel which would be better (I imagine) but the PA28 I fly still has more than this.
I know that flying IFR I probably won't need to take the control surfaces to their full deflection, so is there a way of 'capping' the maximum travel of the virtual ailerons, so that, say, full 90 degrees to the right on the yoke gives me 70% aileron travel? If this's possible I don't see it solving the twitchy elevator though, as full travel will be needed in the flare!
Does anyone know if this can be made realistic/are there better yokes?
Cheers!
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In FSX you can change the control mode to a linear fashion by editing the .CFG file (Google it). Then you can use the sensitivity sliders to reduce the range of motion. A better option is to use a payware add-on program called FSUIPC (Google it), which will allow you to edit the controls more precisely.
Frankly you won't ever get it to feel realistic, but it might be sufficient for your purposes. If you are just practicing procedures it might be easier and cheaper to just use the mouse and keyboard.
Frankly you won't ever get it to feel realistic, but it might be sufficient for your purposes. If you are just practicing procedures it might be easier and cheaper to just use the mouse and keyboard.
I always thought CH yokes were way too sensitive. Beware the Saitek yoke too, the one I had was garbage. Mainly because the yoke was spring loaded to center pitch and there was a null zone in the center!!!
The only other yoke I'd consider now is the fancy $600 one. But meh.
The only other yoke I'd consider now is the fancy $600 one. But meh.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You talk about yoke and rudder movement but I suggest on your next flight you check the movement of the real controls !
At a fast cruise you will find the real controls only move about 1 inch at high speed while as you know in landing near the stall the rudder and elevators will give full deflection!
Sadly the MSFS flight dynamics engine is highly complex and has hardly changed over the years modelling flight dynamics poorly especially in put of the box manoeuvres!
Down load models from realairsimulations where flight dynamics guru Rob Young extracted and tricked the MSFS dynamics engine into giving a quite realistic feel ! Also look at controls which are spring loaded to give an artificial resistance
Pace
At a fast cruise you will find the real controls only move about 1 inch at high speed while as you know in landing near the stall the rudder and elevators will give full deflection!
Sadly the MSFS flight dynamics engine is highly complex and has hardly changed over the years modelling flight dynamics poorly especially in put of the box manoeuvres!
Down load models from realairsimulations where flight dynamics guru Rob Young extracted and tricked the MSFS dynamics engine into giving a quite realistic feel ! Also look at controls which are spring loaded to give an artificial resistance
Pace
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Glens o' Angus by way of LA
Age: 60
Posts: 1,975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flight Simmers - How do you make the yoke better?
Options , setting, controls if I remember right select the yoke from the pull down menu if its not already there then hit advanced the set sensitivity to full and null zone to zero and save it
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Location: South Yorkshire
Age: 36
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In FSX you can change the control mode to a linear fashion by editing the .CFG file (Google it). Then you can use the sensitivity sliders to reduce the range of motion. A better option is to use a payware add-on program called FSUIPC (Google it), which will allow you to edit the controls more precisely.
Frankly you won't ever get it to feel realistic, but it might be sufficient for your purposes. If you are just practicing procedures it might be easier and cheaper to just use the mouse and keyboard.
Frankly you won't ever get it to feel realistic, but it might be sufficient for your purposes. If you are just practicing procedures it might be easier and cheaper to just use the mouse and keyboard.
Whilst I found and still find it invaluable, I'm looking for a bit more 'fun' when practicing. I have four monitors kicking around so I'd like two for visuals, one for a panel and I don't know what I'd have the other for (big GPS?!) I like the thought of being able to take off, fly from A to B and watch the runway lights & PAPIs pop out of IMC through my virtual windows (for me, that's the satisfaction I get when on an ILS approach, it's the fascination and awe in knowing that the bunch of steam driven dials in front of me got me lined up).
You talk about yoke and rudder movement but I suggest on your next flight you check the movement of the real controls !
At a fast cruise you will find the real controls only move about 1 inch at high speed while as you know in landing near the stall the rudder and elevators will give full deflection!
Sadly the MSFS flight dynamics engine is highly complex and has hardly changed over the years modelling flight dynamics poorly especially in put of the box manoeuvres!
Down load models from realairsimulations where flight dynamics guru Rob Young extracted and tricked the MSFS dynamics engine into giving a quite realistic feel ! Also look at controls which are spring loaded to give an artificial resistance
Pace
At a fast cruise you will find the real controls only move about 1 inch at high speed while as you know in landing near the stall the rudder and elevators will give full deflection!
Sadly the MSFS flight dynamics engine is highly complex and has hardly changed over the years modelling flight dynamics poorly especially in put of the box manoeuvres!
Down load models from realairsimulations where flight dynamics guru Rob Young extracted and tricked the MSFS dynamics engine into giving a quite realistic feel ! Also look at controls which are spring loaded to give an artificial resistance
Pace
I know that there is less movement in the cruise compared to when operating close to the stall, which is why I questioned what could be done about the elevator... a maximum travel (on the CH yoke) of a couple of inches towards the belly isn't enough in my eyes, which I think results in a twitchy, over sensitive simulation.
I quoted the ailerons in my original post as I reckon that if I'm turning the yoke upside down during anything other than going down the checklist, I'm operating outside my ability. Turning a CH yoke to 70 degrees apparently has the same effect, so I was looking for ways of making this more realistic.
FakePilot- You can remove the null zone in the FS settings (Alt to show menu-> Options-Settings-Controls I think). I took it off and it's much better.
Also, I've seen a free simulator called 'FlightGear'. Is this any good? The visuals don't look brilliant, but is it a more realistic feel than MSFS? I tried X-Plane on my old joystick and thought it was crap. I couldn't even get a plane with the right gear in it, never mind actually do something useful, though maybe I should have given it a bit more of a chance.
Last edited by mr_rodge; 13th May 2013 at 14:44.
I use the CH Flight Sim Yoke and find it adequate to the task. There are others which are much more expensive and deliver better performance, but I believe it is really the settings in the controls panel plus the flight model you use which makes all the difference.
If you wish to do even more in terms of settings, Peter Dowson's FSUIPC allows further possibilities in calibrating the yoke or stick.
However, there is something which needs to be said (again) about MSFS, which I seem to repeat to those outside that industry quite regularly.
The out of the box MSFS is comparable to an out of the box Windows Operating system. Yes, in Windows alone as it comes you have a word processor, a graphics program and most of what you really need. But does anyone use Windows this way? Nobody I know. MSFS is exactly the same. It is a fully operational simulation program but it is primarily an Operating System for addons. It is the addons which turn this product into a useable simulator for many different purposes. Without it, it is exactly what you'd expect of a £50 game.
Yes, this is MSFS too:
as well as this, a full airliner Cockpit built on Prepare 3D, the successor to FSX.
Or this here, a Russian using Project Tupolev.
Home Cockpit Tu-154B-2 (Flying in a circle in the UHPP) - Simulators - Avsim R Us
The impact which addons have are hugely evident as well in scenery as in airplanes. Flight models are HUGELY different. The basic FS planes are in my opinion not the ones one should use for this purpose, most simmers ignore them totally.
You are trying to simulate a PA28, there are several around, commercial and others, which can be used. Carenado have an Archer II, Just Flight an Archer III, there are freeware -140 and -180 around, just google them. I don't know any of them but you need to try them out. There are huge differences.
Personally I fly a vintage Mooney and use the Carenado M20J for training and skill keep over the nasty season. Carenados planes are almost always underpowered vs the real thing which in my case produces just the right amount of difference between my "C" model and the "J" they model
, in other cases, they can be tweaked.
I did find good models for other planes on the freeware market as well as payware, with over 25 years in that field I have come across quite a few excellent and many more totally unusable planes.
Yes, MSFS is more difficult to operate than the real plane, which in itself is not a bad thing. Many sims are like that, even full flight sims. That means however, if you manage the task in MSFS and go to the real plane, you end up having extra capacity because it is easier to fly.
I have taken up the practice to prepare for flights to places I have not been before or other routes which I want to have a previous look at using MSFS X plus the said addon and I have to say, it is a very good thing to do, gives you plenty of extra time in the real thing. I'd have to say that whenever possible I do so using additional scenery (flying in Switzerland and Germany I have photosceneries for both countries plus Austria, there are excellent ones available for the UK) plus where available correctly modelled airports. In the UK, there are MANY small airports published by Alf Denham for free, available at avsim.com.
As I said, I am in simulation business wise since the 1990ties and I do know them all. Flight Gear could not really keep me going for more than a few minutes. X-Plane is an alternative but it is very complex in terms of use and a bit like the Windows vs Linux debate. I know Austin Mayers and some mayor players in X-Plane but I'd like to see it develop more before I'd comit to it. MSFS X has reached a very high level of accuracy not as a naked system but if it is pimped with addons as required for the task. It (as well as Xplane) is used by some professional outfits (especcially the follow up Lockheed Prepare3D engine) and does well there. Tupolev Design Bureau have been running a TU154 rig for pilot training for years by now.
I myself had a 10 year hiatus from real world flying for personal reasons and I'd honestly have to say without the fact that I did work as a editor for a flightsim mag and as such have logged well over 10k hours on MSFS since the 1990ties have helped me big time getting back in.
So yes, MSFS can and should be used in this context but with properly set up controls, with the addons you need for your tasking and with sufficient seriousness required of any form of training. But then it can be a relatively inexpensive way of keeping up and working your way towards a goal.
Best regards
An2 Driver
If you wish to do even more in terms of settings, Peter Dowson's FSUIPC allows further possibilities in calibrating the yoke or stick.
However, there is something which needs to be said (again) about MSFS, which I seem to repeat to those outside that industry quite regularly.
The out of the box MSFS is comparable to an out of the box Windows Operating system. Yes, in Windows alone as it comes you have a word processor, a graphics program and most of what you really need. But does anyone use Windows this way? Nobody I know. MSFS is exactly the same. It is a fully operational simulation program but it is primarily an Operating System for addons. It is the addons which turn this product into a useable simulator for many different purposes. Without it, it is exactly what you'd expect of a £50 game.
Yes, this is MSFS too:
as well as this, a full airliner Cockpit built on Prepare 3D, the successor to FSX.
Or this here, a Russian using Project Tupolev.
Home Cockpit Tu-154B-2 (Flying in a circle in the UHPP) - Simulators - Avsim R Us
The impact which addons have are hugely evident as well in scenery as in airplanes. Flight models are HUGELY different. The basic FS planes are in my opinion not the ones one should use for this purpose, most simmers ignore them totally.
You are trying to simulate a PA28, there are several around, commercial and others, which can be used. Carenado have an Archer II, Just Flight an Archer III, there are freeware -140 and -180 around, just google them. I don't know any of them but you need to try them out. There are huge differences.
Personally I fly a vintage Mooney and use the Carenado M20J for training and skill keep over the nasty season. Carenados planes are almost always underpowered vs the real thing which in my case produces just the right amount of difference between my "C" model and the "J" they model
, in other cases, they can be tweaked. I did find good models for other planes on the freeware market as well as payware, with over 25 years in that field I have come across quite a few excellent and many more totally unusable planes.
Yes, MSFS is more difficult to operate than the real plane, which in itself is not a bad thing. Many sims are like that, even full flight sims. That means however, if you manage the task in MSFS and go to the real plane, you end up having extra capacity because it is easier to fly.
I have taken up the practice to prepare for flights to places I have not been before or other routes which I want to have a previous look at using MSFS X plus the said addon and I have to say, it is a very good thing to do, gives you plenty of extra time in the real thing. I'd have to say that whenever possible I do so using additional scenery (flying in Switzerland and Germany I have photosceneries for both countries plus Austria, there are excellent ones available for the UK) plus where available correctly modelled airports. In the UK, there are MANY small airports published by Alf Denham for free, available at avsim.com.
As I said, I am in simulation business wise since the 1990ties and I do know them all. Flight Gear could not really keep me going for more than a few minutes. X-Plane is an alternative but it is very complex in terms of use and a bit like the Windows vs Linux debate. I know Austin Mayers and some mayor players in X-Plane but I'd like to see it develop more before I'd comit to it. MSFS X has reached a very high level of accuracy not as a naked system but if it is pimped with addons as required for the task. It (as well as Xplane) is used by some professional outfits (especcially the follow up Lockheed Prepare3D engine) and does well there. Tupolev Design Bureau have been running a TU154 rig for pilot training for years by now.
I myself had a 10 year hiatus from real world flying for personal reasons and I'd honestly have to say without the fact that I did work as a editor for a flightsim mag and as such have logged well over 10k hours on MSFS since the 1990ties have helped me big time getting back in.
So yes, MSFS can and should be used in this context but with properly set up controls, with the addons you need for your tasking and with sufficient seriousness required of any form of training. But then it can be a relatively inexpensive way of keeping up and working your way towards a goal.
Best regards
An2 Driver
Last edited by AN2 Driver; 13th May 2013 at 18:18. Reason: PA28 remarks added.
